Lyn Perry, Writer

Pages

Tuesday, January 01, 2019

Words have meaning. This is because words are connected to
reality – they represent something actual and thus convey what’s real, what’s
true. Sure, words themselves (I’m thinking of nouns, especially) aren’t
ontologically related to objects. A tree is real, the word tree is a mere
representation. A tree could just as well have come to be known as a gigglypoo.

But over the centuries, definitions arise, standards are set.
We recognize that words mean something. Now, I wouldn’t use the phrase ‘social
construct’ (because of its current political and SJW connotations) but if you
made the point that what we call things seems arbitrary, I wouldn’t argue with
you. Why isn’t a tree a gigglypoo? I won’t go into language theory at this point,
but the short answer: that’s how it is.

You can insist on calling a tree something else, but that
simply causes confusion and discounts centuries of dictionary usage. I recall
in junior high one of my friends had a running gag calling cows fish. On the
bus to school we’d laugh at his juvenile (and nonsensical) joke, but we all
knew his words were being twisted beyond meaning.

I think you see where I’m heading with this.

Pronouns, too, have meaning. He, him, his refer to the male of
a species. She, her, hers refer to the female. They have done so (through
various forms and via word/gender endings) for centuries. They represent
biological reality. Pronouns (and words in general) adhere to standards that
help society function smoothly, with clarity and precision. Meaningful words make
communication possible.

Enter gender theory, which finds its roots in the writings
of a French philosopher and novelist named Simone de Beauvoir. She was one of
the first to popularize the conception that, “One is not born, one is made a
woman.” (The Second Sex, 1949) I think she was arguing against gender roles
(which is a separate and important topic), but extreme feminists have since
proclaimed that we are ‘assigned’ gender at birth (which is complete nonsense,
by the way, since our sex, also known as gender, is biologically determined at
conception, no one assigns it to us).

The biological reality is that there are two sexes, two
genders. And the words representing these realities have meaning insofar as we
adhere to reality. Gender confusion has produced pronoun madness – people are
insisting that they be referred to in fantastical ways. Women want to adopt he,
him, his pronouns; men want to adopt she, her, hers pronouns. (Some even want
to adopt they, them, theirs – as if a singular person can be a plurality!)

This is delusion. This is fantasy. This breaks with reality.
This is untrue, incredible, and nonsensical. A man cannot become a woman; a
woman cannot become a man. Chromosomes are what they are. We are binary beings.
Talk of non-binary persons and third gender persons is simply a journey through
the rabbit hole into absurd silliness.

Unfortunately, the situation we find ourselves in today is
not silly. It is dangerous. The Evil One has cast a great deception on our
culture with regards to gender and pronouns – and this has real world consequences.

For example, social media platforms like Facebook and
Twitter are censoring views like this one from the public square. This post (or
link to this post or tweet about this post) may be arbitrarily taken down for
violating an ever-changing set of ‘community standards’ – which, by and large,
defines opposition to the prevailing regressive left’s agenda as hate speech. One
can be banned for simply pointing out biological reality (if that’s the case
here, it’s been nice to know you). There is an admitted bias in Silicon Valley
against conservative views.

Big tech companies aren’t alone in their attempt to suppress
free expression. Mastercard and Visa have been pressured by the country’s leading
hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, to discontinue servicing groups
the SPLC deems are hate groups. This is a very dangerous precedent and amounts
to an attack on free enterprise.

Back on topic – for NOT using a student’s preferred pronoun,
a teacher in Virginia was fired. The teacher said he would call the student by her
new name (she wants to be viewed as a male and has taken on a masculine name)
and would simply refrain from using any pronouns at all with regard to this
student. But that was not good enough for the trans-movement tyrants. He must
be *compelled* to use untrue speech. This, too, is a dangerous trend.

And this is the issue. Pronoun madness is forcing people to
use words that no longer align with reality. And communication suffers as a
result. Now if you are going by a different name than the one you were ‘assigned’
at birth, great. Your choice. Your name was assigned. Your gender was not. If
you want to be called Gigglypoo, wonderful. But if you want me to use gigg/giggly/poo
as your preferred pronouns, then you are living in a fantasy land. I mean you’re
free to do what you want, you’ve got free speech as well, just don’t expect me –
or force me – to eat the mushrooms with you.

Happy New Year.

Addendum: There are many more words that have lost or are in
danger of losing their meaning due to extended misuse, including phobia,
gender, racism, privilege, Nazi, hate, marriage. And literally.

Monday, August 20, 2018

At his open call invitation a few years back, a number of us writers jumped at an idea and collaborated with Joe Konrath and collectively wrote a number of stories that featured his spunky female homocide detective, Lt. Jack Daniels, while introducing our own main characters.

My private eye is Ava Jane (AJ) Rakowski, a mentalist of sorts, who is called into assist Daniels and her partner in a series of abductions and murders. I had a blast writing my two stories (Abductions and Beat Down), which Joe edited and added to. He then was kind enough to publish these collaborations and split the royalties with us authors 50/50.

This was actually before Kindle Worlds, but when Amazon launched that initiative, I think most of us agreed to put our stories in KW - and it was wonderful exposure. Over the last few years, I've had a steady (if smallish) income stream hit my bank account each month. Fun times!

Then Kindle Worlds closed. But Konrath, like Hugh Howey (of Wool fame), is an indie writer advocate and very generous with his IP. He encouraged us to re-publish our collaborations on our own. So with Joe's permission, I'm making available (on Amazon for now and then on other platforms like B and N, Kobo, etc.) the two short stories I wrote with him.

Here they are! Hope you enjoy them. (BTW, I wrote them under my pen name, Garth Perry, as they are a bit grittier than my usual speculative fare. Also below is another AJ Rakowski story called Drinking Games. I think you'll like this one too.)

Psychic Investigator AJ Rakowski can't talk to the dead, but she can 'dial' into a dead person's vibes. Why this qualifies her as a consultant for the Chicago Police Department is a mystery to skeptical Homicide Lt. Jack Daniels, who has real cases to solve.

But when Rakowski is brought on to help stop a serial kidnapper from abducting his next victim, Jack is forced to work with AJ. A girl's life is on the line, and maybe if the two learn to accept their differences and join forces, they just might be able to stop the...ABDUCTIONS.

Kidnapping can be murder...

(Note: Abductions is a 9,000 word novella (about 35 pages) featuring JA Konrath's heroine Jacqueline "Jack" Daniels who is the star of more than 1 million books, and Garth Perry's new heroine AJ Rakowski. Features action, suspense, and a fair dose of dark humor.)

Psychic Investigator Ava Jane Rakowski, part time consultant for the Chicago Police Department, just solved her first crime. Her supervisor, Homicide Detective Lt. Jack Daniels, is skeptical. Good old fashioned police work would likely have tracked down the serial kidnapper, Raphael Ortega, in due time.

Unfortunately, Ortega is now out of jail because of an apparent clerical error. And when the brutal killings begin it doesn’t take a psychic to connect the dots. The only question is if they’ll find Ortega before he gives his next victim – which happens to be AJ’s best friend Tomen – a brutal BEAT DOWN.

Revenge can be murder...

(Note: Beat Down is a 14,000 word novella (about 60 pages) featuring JA Konrath's heroine Jacqueline "Jack" Daniels who is the star of more than 1 million books, and Garth Perry's new heroine AJ Rakowski. Features action, suspense, and a fair dose of dark humor.)

More Mentalist than Medium, Ava Jane Rakowski has finally accepted the fact that she can't speak with the dead. That doesn't stop her from using her paranormal gifts to help the living - especially those in desperate need. From finding missing persons to solving homicides, Rakowski is on the case.

With each success, however, comes unwanted attention. AJ knows it goes with the territory. The occasional nut job will propose marriage. An oddball stalker will make a fool of himself. But when she captures the attention of a serial killer known only as Carlton, that's when the real game begins.

Monday, July 23, 2018

I'm preaching a summer series on "Tough Questions for the Christian" and we are currently exploring the topic of God's wrath. The question is: How can a God of love express wrath toward His creation?

Here's the outline of my sermon from this past Sunday.

1.God’s Wrath vs Human Anger
a)God’s wrath (often translated as anger) is a position against sin, death, and the devil.
b)Human anger is often an emotion that comes and goes based on circumstances.
-See Ephesians 4.26-27 – “In your anger, do not sin.” That is, St. Paul admonishes us that our anger, when it occurs, should be more like God’s anger who takes a stand against injustice and evil. God’s wrath is never sinful or wrong. He is holy.
-But if our anger is a result of an emotional flare up, then don’t let it fester. (“Don’t let the sun go down on your anger.…”)
-Why? It can give the devil a foothold (vs 27) in one’s life and thus opens the door to sin.
-Anger as an emotion isn’t necessarily wrong, but it can lead to sinful reactions and actions.
c) God’s anger/wrath is different. It’s not an emotion. It’s an expression of his love.

What??

2.God’s Anger and God’s Love – Not “Either/Or” but “Both/And”
a)Both are a reality found within the scripture. “It is simply impossible to read the bible as a whole and not recognize the reality of God’s anger.” (Wright, p 130)
b)It is equally impossible to read the bible and not see that God is love and has love for all.
-1 John 4.7-10 – Love is from God. God is love. This is love, that he sent his son.
-John 3.16 – For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son…
-Psalm 145.17 – The Lord is kind/faithful (expresses “covenant love”) in all he does.
c)God IS love but God HAS wrath.
-God’s love is eternal because God is eternal. Love is God’s very nature.
-God’s wrath is temporary and will end with the destruction and elimination of sin.
-Why? Because the only thing that arouses God’s wrath is evil (not his creation).
-“The very essence of evil is to resist, reject, and refuse the love of God.” (Wright, p 131)

God’s wrath is an expression of his love. “It is precisely because God loves the world so much that he is angry against all who defy the goodness of what God wants for the world.” (Wright, p 133) That is, if God were not angry with evil, he could not really claim to love the world. (Think of the injustices of the world. Could God really just wink at them in doting love or benign neglect? NO! God is rightly angry at evil and injustice because of his great love for creation.)

3.Enter the mystery of the cross.
a)The cross represents a host of wonderful metaphors (“pictures of reality”) that demonstrate God’s love: redeemed, reconciled, justified, adopted, healed, forgiven, cleansed, in Christ…
b)But the cross goes beyond metaphor. There is an actual substitution going on – God’s love and wrath work together as God takes on the sin of the world (love) in order to eliminate it (wrath).
c )See John Stott’s The Cross of Christ. – “The concept of substitution may be said, then, to lie at the heart of both sin and salvation. For the essence of sin is man substituting himself for God, while the essence of salvation is God substituting himself for man. Man asserts himself against God and puts himself where only God deserves to be; God sacrifices himself for man and puts himself where only man deserves to be. Man claims prerogatives which belong to God alone; God accepts penalties which belong to man alone.” (as quoted in Wright, p 125)

Conclusion: 1 Thessalonians 5.9-11 (NIV)

9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. 10 He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him. 11 Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

(Note: I wrote this piece below as a FB post back in 2014. During that year I took a break from being a pastor and visited a number of churches looking for a 'home.' I was on a spiritual journey - still am! - and am still thinking about this topic, communion. In 2015 I returned to pastoral ministry and last year I wrote this piece on the Eucharist. Now I'm thinking about writing another reflection on how this issue divides believers; the following thoughts can serve as my jumping off point. So that's the context. Hope this is of interest.)

March 23, 2014.

Visited another church today. As you might guess, I’m sort of on a journey to find a spiritual home, post-pastorate. Have recently experienced a few contemporary churches – which, although supposedly visitor friendly, left me dissatisfied. I’ve already ranted about the shallowness of band-centered worship and won’t go into that here.

So I went for the opposite end of the spectrum and worshiped at a liturgical church this morning. Lutheran – WELS. And, as is often the complaint of many who are unfamiliar with the liturgy, it wasn’t very visitor friendly. But not because I had to juggle the hymnal and lectionary.

It was because of communion.

Though we didn’t ‘commune’ (partake of communion) this morning, I doubt I would have been allowed to had the church celebrated it. Most conservative Lutheran churches practice ‘close communion’ – which I’d always thought was spelled closed. There’s a slight difference, and you can google it like I did.

But my take away is this: Want to turn away visitors? Card them.

That’s right. There was a card in the pew that I had to sign and give to the pastor before the service if I wanted to commune. I had to affirm that I belonged to a church that was in fellowship with theirs before I could share in the Lord’s Supper. (Oh, whose supper? Ah, just checking.)

Now, don’t get me wrong. Communion’s not a free-for-all. But verbalizing that the meal is for serious disciples of Christ is one thing. Telling Christians they can’t participate in the Lord’s Supper unless certain hoops are hopped is another. I’ll tip my hand right now, I’m an advocate of open communion.

Here’s why.

First, communion is a picture of grace. It’s the body and blood of Christ offered freely to sinners. The meal is not for perfect people, it’s for repentant people. All Christians are sinners, therefore all Christians should be invited to eat at the table, regardless of church or denominational affiliation.

Second, communion is for the universal community of believers (called the communion of saints). Who determines membership in this communion? God’s Holy Spirit. Upon one’s confession of faith (Rom 10.9) one is saved and therefore an invited participant at the table.

To place non-biblical hurdles before the table isn’t just visitor unfriendly, it’s a misrepresentation to the seeker what God’s free offer of salvation is all about, imo. The Lord’s Supper is for Christians who want to be right with God and right with others – regardless of church/denominational standing.

Now, I get it. Those who advocate for close communion are seeking to protect the sacrament. But, you know, I just don’t hear God calling us to protect something he’s offering us free of charge.

Not that communion is for everyone - it makes no sense for a non-believer to participate in this spiritual activity. So really, if someone’s not a Christian, why would they want to eat the body and drink the blood of Christ?

Wednesday, March 28, 2018

If you were to distill the teaching and preaching of Jesus
into a few words or a short phrase, what would come up with? Love? Forgive
others? Care for the poor?

Let me put the question like this: What theme in Jesus’s
teaching and preaching is so crucial to understanding him that if you removed
it from his lips, you wouldn’t have the biblical Jesus anymore?

You still like the answer of love?

Did you know Jesus only mentions love two times in the
synoptic Gospels? He tells his disciples to love God and love your neighbor as
yourself (referred to together as the greatest commandment; parallel accounts in
Matthew 22.37-39 / Mark 12:30-31 / Luke 10:2) and love your enemies (also in
two accounts, Matthew 5.44 / Luke 6.27). [BTW, you can use BibleGateway or Bible Hub to look up verses.]

Out of all the
recorded words of Jesus, he devotes two lines to the topic of love.

Evidently, Jesus didn’t make love the hallmark of his
preaching. Similar points can be made with other big themes we think are at the
core of Jesus’ teaching: forgiveness, serving others, trusting God, helping the
poor, defending the oppressed, etc.

Not that these themes are absent from the teaching of Jesus.
Not at all. But they aren’t the core, they don’t summarize what is at the heart
of the proclamation of Jesus. They actually flow out of his primary message.

Which is? For the biblical answer, we need to simply read what the
Gospel writers wrote as their summaries of what Jesus was all about.

Let’s start with the
Gospel of Matthew.

Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues
and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom and curing every disease and every
sickness among the people. (Matthew 4.23)

Then Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching
in their synagogues, and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and curing
every disease and every sickness. (Matthew 9.35)

He then tells his disciples: “As you go, proclaim the good
news, ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’” (Matthew 10.7)

Very clearly, at the heart of the teaching of Jesus – and the
core message he wants his followers to proclaim – is the kingdom of God. In fact,
in Matthew 6.10, we are to pray to God, “Thy kingdom come.” And in Matthew 6.33,
we are to seek first the kingdom of God.

What is the Kingdom
of God?

The kingdom of God (or, often in Matthew, the kingdom of Heaven,
same thing) is simply God’s reign. It’s not a realm (a place, like a physical dominion
with borders), nor is the kingdom a particular people. The kingdom of God is
God’s ruling power or authority present in this world.

Now this kingdom creates a people (those who submit to God’s
rule) and impacts a place (where a particular location demonstrates the
attributes of the God’s rule). But again, simply put, God’s kingdom equals God’s
reign.

Let’s Continue with Luke’s
Summary

From Luke 4.16-21, 43.

When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he
went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to
read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the
scroll and found the place where it was written:

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed
me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the
captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to
proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

And he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant,
and sat down. The eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. Then he began
to say to them, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”

… He said to them, “I must proclaim the good news of the
kingdom of God to the other cities also; for I was sent for this purpose.”

See also Luke 8.1 – Soon afterwards he went on through
cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of
God.

And in Luke 10.8-9 Jesus authorizes his disciples to do what
he has been doing: Whenever you enter a town and its people welcome you, eat
what is set before you; cure the sick who are there, and say to them, ‘The
kingdom of God has come near to you.’

Finally, the Gospel
of Mark

The most succinct summary of Jesus’s teaching is in the
Gospel of Mark. He tells us right at the outset what the ministry of Jesus is
all about.

Mark 1.14-15 – Now after John was arrested, Jesus came to
Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled,
and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news.”

Three point message, the first and last highlight the core: The kingdom of God has come near.

Yes, love, forgiveness, care for the poor, serving others,
etc. are part of Jesus’s message, but they flow from the heart of his teaching
and preaching, which is the kingdom of God.

It’s still the core message of the church today: repent and
believe the good news that the time is fulfilled and God’s reign is at hand.

Welcome!

Thanks for stopping by! I'm Lyn Perry and I write and reflect on the interplay of faith and fiction. I'm a pastor, coffee drinker, and herder of cats. I also run Tule Fog Press, an indie publisher of a variety of genres. For monthly perks and prizes, please subscribe to our mailing list. I'll send you a free book right away for your trouble! Also, drop me a line at lyngperry @ yahoo.com. I look forward to hearing from you!